介绍

在过去的十年中,设计思维继续受欢迎。在网上都有无数的课程,图形和文章(包括我们自己的主题)manbetx官网手机登陆文章,视频,和course.) As any trend, it can grow to have a life of its own.

在NN / G我们开始了一个长期的研究项目,了解设计思维如何影响所产生的产品的质量以及从业者如何在其设计工作中纳入设计思考。但是,为了估计设计思维对我们领域的影响,我们需要先确定UX和设计专业人士如何定义设计思维.

Research Method

该研究阶段由华盛顿特区,旧金山,波士顿,北卡罗来纳州和北卡罗来纳州和16名远程访谈,通过电话和通过视频会议组成。这87名参与者代表了各种国家,行业,角色和经验。

拦截由两个主要问题组成:

  1. 当你听到“设计思维”这句话时,怎么看待什么?
  2. 你如何定义设计思维?

Interviews consisted of 10 questions, excluding demographic-related questions:

  1. 当我说“设计思考”时,我想到的第一个措辞是什么?
  2. Can you tell me more about [word they supplied in response to question 1]?
  3. 你如何定义设计思维?为什么?
  4. 练习设计思维是什么意思?
  5. What are the positive or negative effects of design thinking?
  6. 设计思维如何影响以下内容?
  • 产品与服务
  • 处理
  • 雇员
  • 客户/客户
  1. Using this scale, what is your experience using design thinking?
  2. 使用相同的规模,设计思维有多成功患上了你的经历?
  3. 什么可能更好?
  4. 什么是设计思维有什么好处?设计思维是什么不好?

本文总结了我们对设计思维的受访者的看法和心理模型的高级别调查结果。随访文章将讨论与特定manbetx官网手机登陆工具和活动,福利,批评和战略建议相关的结果。

Most importantly, this research aims to uncover design thinking in an impartial, straightforward way. Our研究is self-funded,这使我们能够通过第三方兴趣和说实话,因为我们在与真正的用户的实证研究中发现它。我们不必遵循ux时尚或趋势,我们也不需要将客户推向次优专有或商标解决方案。

Design Thinking: Associations

在要求参与者定义设计思维之前,我们试图通过与设计思维自由相关的受访者学习或概念。

The number of words offered by the participants ranged from 0 to 7, with most participants providing 2 words. The average number of words per participant was 2.25; the median was 2. Some participants provided words that were not related to each other and, in some cases, even contradicted each other. While respondents’ responses ranged in structure, the majority of associations could be grouped within one of the following thematic categories:

  • 特点描述了设计思维的特点以用户为中心要么迭代.
  • 用途指示可以应用设计思维的一般领域(例如,解决问题,战略).
  • 具体步骤named stages within the design-thinking process (e.g.,研究,validate).
  • 视觉sincluded words describing either existing design-thinking visualizations (e.g.,循环) or images associated with design-thinking practices (e.g.,sticky notes).
  • Institutions (or brands)描述了特定的品牌版本的设计,以思考参与者熟悉或者他们在与设计思维相同的背景下经常提到的。这个主题还包括一个地方(San Francisco,Finland)与设计思维相关。
  • Interpretations包括积极和否定词,反映了关于设计思维的态度(例如,trendy,没用).
  • 感知结果包括诸如options,思想,和改进describing how design thinking changed the state of the world or of a design.
  • 未分类包括单词(例如,咨询)不适合上述类别。

Word Cloud: Design Thinking Free Associations

这个词云突出了最常见的响应;最常见的单词是过程,迭代,协作和设计。(字体的大小大致与该字数的响应数大致成比例。)

类别 Words included Number of words (percentage out of all words) Number of distinct words Percentage of participants who mentined a word in this category (out of 71 people)
特点 流程,设计,迭代,协作,创新,创造性,分歧,收敛,艺术,渐进,持续,新的方法,实验,生产力,强大的工具,团队合作 66 (44%) 16 62%
用途 问题解决,人类/用户中心设计,商业,教育,战略,研讨会,产品,学习人员,服务设计 21(14%) 9 24%
Specific Steps 研究, observe, ideate, create, make, prototype, validate, reflection 13 (8%) 6 13%
视觉 双钻石,空间组织,循环,粘滞便笺 5(3%) 4 6%
Institutions 斯坦福,苹果,Ideo,IBM,芬兰,旧金山 11(7%) 5 10%
Interpretations 时尚,误解,高估,流行语,不用,暧昧,不同的版本,不仅仅是UX,而不是视觉效果,而不是设计 11(7%) 10 18%
结果 innovation, fit into the world, options, ideas, improve, productivity, effectiveness 10 (6%) 7 11%
未分类 bias, consultancy, whole organization, crossdepartment 4 (2%) 4 4%

This table shows the words listed by our participants in each of the 7 main themes. We show how many free associates (out of the total number of words) fell in each category, how many different words were in each category, and the percentage of respondents who mentioned a word in that category. Scroll the table to the right to see more data.

这些研究结果表明majority of people (62% of our respondents) associate design thinking with characteristic-like attributes,可能是因为这样的属性是:

  • Tangible: Characteristic-based language is the most basic way to teach and grasp an otherwise abstract concept, without the specific, often confusing design-thinking jargon.
  • Consistent: All ‘branded’ definitions of design thinking (provided by varying institutions) include these kinds of descriptors (whereas they may otherwise preach conflicting language and value propositions).
  • Popular: The most popular visual representations (e.g., viaGoogle image search)描绘设计思维作为“过程”(这是此类别中最常见的特征词)。

特征的类别也最少的diverse: out of the total 66 words provided in this category, there were only 16 distinct words. That means that a lot of these words were supplied by more than one participant. Respondents often named these characteristics in pairs. Duplicative pairings included iterative and collaboration, process and design, divergent and convergent.

Other attribute categories were far less popular than the characteristics one. The runner up was the uses category, with 24% of the participants providing a word related to the use of design thinking. If we expanded this category to include organization-related words (crossdepartment and whole organization), this bucket would grow to 27%.

The interpretation theme was the most diverse, excluding the uncategorized group. Out of the 11 words falling under interpretation, only one (trendy) was offered by two participants. Whereas most of the words associated with the other themes reflected a neutral (debatably positive-leaning) attitude, the interpretation category carried clear positive or negative perceptions. Words in this category often came in pairs of two: trendy and buzzword, overrated and not useful.

其他主题接收了相对较少的答复:不到11%的参与者提供了任何这些类别的词。2%的单词是未分类的。

Our own visualization of design thinking是一个圆圈,强调我们推荐的迭代方法。这个图形是众所周知,突出显示设计思维的过程方面之一。这种视觉效果的累积效果影响了从业者如何感知概念。

Design Thinking Definitions: Mental Models

We also asked participants to define design thinking in their own words. The majority of answers fell into one or several of the categories below.

1. Process

Several participants defined design thinking as a problem-solving process. Within this category, respondents often drew parallels to the creative process. For example, participants defined design thinking as “guiding a group of individuals through the creative process” and “a way of applying the creative process to traditional business problems and services.”

In other cases, this process-oriented definition was associated with traditional user- or human-centered theories, such as “an approach to problem forming and solving that is focused on who you are designing for” and “a process for thinking through a problem and looking at all the aspects of what influences something and someone.”

2. Mindset Shift

一些参与者定义了设计思考,主要是一个心态转移或“改变你的想法方式”。与这种心态转变相关的单词是“新的,开箱即用”或“不同的工作方式”。与主要设计的人主要作为一个过程中的那些思考的人,关联设计思维的参与者参考了在工作之外应用这种类型的思维。“它甚至不是关于工作,也是生活......这是一种观察和缩小你可以在你的日常使用的事情的一种方式。”

3. Toolkit

The most complex and diverse group of definitions came from participants who viewed design thinking as a flexible, adaptable toolkit. These participants did not associate a specific process with design thinking, but rather viewed it as scaffolding to solve both organizational (often internal) and end-user (external, product-related) problems.

Definitions in this class often referenced how design thinking combines different processes, tools, and ways of thinking in order to handle a problem or project and “to dependably produce successful/meaningful/effective results for the business and user.”

我们看到这三种方法将设计思想定义为持续的看法,并假设他们镜像专业人士设计思维的经验量。As people become expert at design thinking, they change their understandingof it: from perceiving it as a prescribed process to a mindset and finally to a dynamic toolkit appropriate for approaching a wide variety of problems. Further research is needed to investigate this hypothesis.

为什么要对准事项

最大的优势之一,但设计思维的弱点是存在no single, widely used definition为了它。这种意义的灵活性是有益的,因为它鼓励挑战,探索和查询,并允许人们使人们成为他们的需求的概念。

然而,定义设计思维的多种方式转化为团队和组织内的摩擦,分歧和误解。歧义周围的设计思维是如何实践的,其可衡量的影响导致矛盾的意见,误解的目标和未对外的结果。

建立共享基线

Regardless of your own perception of design thinking, it is important to have an educated understanding of how others define design thinking. As indicated above, design thinking can mean a variety of things to different people. When collaborating or sharing your own experiences (whether positive or negative), articulate your definition of design thinking: what does it mean in the context in which you are practicing, advocating, or criticizing?

Developing Empathy for Peers/Others

Encountering resistance and frustration is common when introducing design thinking to a team or organization. Often times, however, this frustration is less about the practice as a whole. Rather, it is often tied to an assumption, perception, or past experience. If discussing or encouraging design thinking, understand the perspectives and current associations of your peers, before implementing change.

Increasing Your Likelihood of Adoption

了解各种观点(甚至只是不同的术语)将帮助您导航感受和现有的心理,从而提高您采用的可能性。首先创建设计思维的共享定义:它是什么,就像它不是什么一样。此定义不一定需要遵循行业规范 - 在您组织的背景下,您希望设计思考贡献?你可以更有形,更好。建立共享视觉,对齐语言,并同意理想的结果。

结论

Although there may be no single, widely used definition of design thinking, there is unexpected unity in how people conceptualize design thinking. 62% of our research participants associated characteristic-related words with design thinking, and not only that — they tended to come up with the same words.

This high proportion of vague “process” words suggests that most people know something about design thinking, but may not be able to articulate precisely what it entails.

This design thinking initial research has four clear takeaways:

  • 虽然人们可能会融合设计思维的一般思想,但它们并不一定在概念上精确掌握。这种收敛性也在很大程度上否定了意见 - 概念的统一不一定是关于影响,效应或有用性的达成协议。
  • 这种缺乏全球共识使您的团队必须对齐。创建用于设计思维的工作定义,不仅仅是停止 - 该定义中的具体词语意味着什么?
  • 因此,测量设计思维的效果取决于定义本身 - 什么是且未被认为是在测量的具体背景下的设计思考。
  • More research is needed in order to better understand what makes design thinking successful or unsuccessful, effective adoption methods, and constraint-driven best practices.